From Outdoor News:

Speaking for myself, I would like to see the DNR institute a state-wide slot to protect the fish between 25" - 29". Why ANYONE would want to keep a fish that size perplexes me. They don't taste as good and they aren't big enough to be considered a trophy. Myself, I would never keep ANY big walleye (unless I thought it might be a state record). Catch and release is the way to go, if you ask me.

Some very good points here. Lucky_nuggets, If 400,000 lbs is 400,000 lbs why not just let everyone net the lake? Or have no slot? when 400,000 lbs are reached that's it. The reason we do not do this is we know better now that this is the wrong way to manage a fish population. What is essentially happing on ML is the bands declare what they will take and the anglers are restricted by Lbs. and slots to help balance out the population. So this is not a true partnership in managing the lake as the anglers are the ones making the changes needed to keep the population healthy. The bands even upped there take when the population is down. How is this a partnership?

Look in the "Gill Net" section. It reads, "Your tribe must have declared a quota for a lake to be available for netting."

http://www.glifwc.org/regulations/MN_SpearingNetting.pdf

I would like some confirmation, but my best guess is that the Tribes tells the DNR what their quota will be and then the quota for anglers is adjusted accordingly. I could be wrong, though. From what I understand, the DNR has no jurisdiction over the Tribes, whatsoever.

I thought it was a Federal offence to touch a tribes net???? We do not want to give anyone idea's, that could land them in trouble.

The DNR and the Tribes work together in a partnership that so far has been very successful and we, the lay person, should just stay out of it. I believe, and could very well be wrong, that if the tribe really wanted to stick it to us, it could convince the federal court to lift all partnerships and net the heck out of that lake. So far, they have been very good partners and are as concerned for the health of the lake as we are.

I think this is the wrong attitude to have. Responsible people who enjoy the outdoors... whether that be anglers, hunters, bird watchers, or whatever...have always been a group of people who put a lot of effort into making the outdoors an enjoyable experience for EVERYONE. And when we have seen evidence of a practice that could potentially damage or even destroy that outdoors experience, than I think it's our DUTY to stand up and make our voices heard.

To "stay out of it" out of fear that the Native Americans would take more fish through netting than they currently are is wrong.

Again, for the record, I don't have a beef with the tradition of netting. My beef is how it's done and that there could be a better way to do it that would help protect the fishery.

Hey Kid, Your Loc: says Mars, were is that?

I guess my point was that we are doing something about it by letting the people who know the most, the DNR, handle it for us, much in the same way we let the police deal with the bad guy's as opposed to us all strapping cold steal to our legs.

Depends on what time of year. anywhere from 36 million miles to over 250 million miles. The gas prices are killing me.

I'm not advocating, nor do I think anyone else is, that we should deal with this on our own. Of course, this would have to be done through the courts or have the DNR attempt to reason with the Tribes. What we need to do is get the word out and voice our complaints to the DNR, which I have done.

And every time the Police do something that the general public feel is not appropriate, it is evaluated and sometimes changed

MetroWalleye, I appreciate your stance on this issue. Sometimes I wonder what would've happened to the Indians if the white man had not offered any treaty deal back in the 19th century. If things had continued the way they were going back then, there might not be any Indians around today. But that is just conjecture on my part.

However, at this point in time, we are discussing a shared resource and it's covered by state and federal law. White man takes his walleye during controlled, regulated seasons by hook and line - Indians take their walleye during a controlled, regulated season by hook and line, spearing and netting. White man is a citizen of a sovereign nation - Indian is a citizen of a sovereign nation.

I wonder if any traditions exist in the White man's world regarding spearing and netting for subsistence. White man's seasons began to be regulated way back in the early 20th century to prevent overfishing. White man stopped spearing and netting and was able to successfully manage most, if not all, walleye water.

Impact of White man's method of harvest are quite detailed and accurate - Impact from Indians methods of harvest are vague at this time, but is becoming more detailed each year.

With luck, we will all benefit from shared regulation of shared resource. It is what it is, and we must live with it even though we don't agree with present system.

After reading a good deal of this thread, I'd like to toss my idea into the ring... and call someone on something as well.
I have absolutely no issue with the Mille Lacs Band being allowed to net, as per the treaty. While it's kind of a joke that parts of the treaty are being exploited while others aren't, I feel if they want to net, then let them. But make it trap nets, and try to milk as many as possible.
My biggest problem with this situation is the out of state tribes that are coming in as well. The treaty wasn't signed by or for them, so they should have no claim in any way whatsoever to the rights included in it.
So, as others have said, let the LOCAL BAND use trap nets, maybe let the DNR do a little milking, and all would be better, IMHO.

AANDERUD - your numbers back on page 2 of this thread are nice, but highly inaccurate. What your data lacks is any kind of replacement for those fish taken. You do not take into account how many eggs those 1000 fish would lay, and of those, how many reach maturity. Show me a chart that has how many more fish would have been hatched if not for the removal of those fish, and you'll get my attention. You're using smoke and mirrors to make a point.

heartman - I agree with much of your post, with the exception of the "sovereign nation" part... yup, the USA is a Sovereign Nation, the natives are a Conquered People. That we allow the sovereign nation status is just another way that someone is trying to make us pay for the sins of those who came before us. Heck, the treaty was signed before my family had even crossed the Atlantic.

I'll now step down from my soap box, as small as it may be.

slick814
You should take a look at that treaty again lol. like I said before that treaty was made before MN was a state and it does include the " out of state bands" and a few more in state bands that were left out of the most recent lawsuit. The pillanger band for example, their chief was one of the main signers of this treaty but they're not netting mille lacs. You should read the treaty it also says nothing about milking walleyes or trap netts.

Someone ask in a previous post if the tribes or bands involved should do something to work together with the state on this. They tried remember before the lawsuit that affirmed their treaty rights. The state turned THEM down remember!